Effective January 1, 2018 Picadio Sneath Miller & Norton, P.C. has merged into, and will now practice law as Houston Harbaugh, P.C. Visit Houston Harbaugh here and learn more about all the ways we can serve you.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has dismissed various contract-based counterclaims arising out of an alleged breach of an organization's "working procedures" ("Procedures") in an antitrust suit.

In Trueposition, Inc. v. Lm Ericsson Tel. Co. Telefonaktiebolaget Lm, No. 11-4574, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145898 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 9, 2013), the plaintiff, which is a member of a standard-setting organization ("SSO"), alleged antitrust violations against the SSO and several of its other members in connection with an alleged conspiracy to exclude the plaintiff's technology from the specification standards set by the SSO. The SSO counterclaimed, alleging that the plaintiff had failed to abide by certain operating rules set forth in the SSO's Procedures. Essentially, it was the SSO's position that the plaintiff had failed to dispute the exclusion of its technology from the SSO's standards in accordance with the Procedures and therefore could not use the antitrust suit as a means of circumventing the SSO's Procedures. The court disagreed, holding that the SSO's Procedures were too indefinite to form an enforceable contract between the SSO and the plaintiff.

According to the court, even if the parties had intended for the Procedures to be a binding contract rather than mere procedural guidelines that were implemented to govern the activities of the SSO, the articles at issue did not sufficiently identify the members' obligations so as to allow the court to determine what conduct constituted a breach or what would happen in the event of breach. Accordingly, separate and apart from the legal question of whether rules or procedures can form the basis of an enforceable contract, the Procedures failed for indefiniteness. The court also dismissed the SSO's claims for declaratory relief, which implicated similar issues under the Procedures. Specifically, the court found that there was no "case or controversy" concerning the standard in dispute because the plaintiff was not using the antitrust suit to challenge the standard (and, in fact, was still working through the SSO's Procedures at the time of the suit), and there was no waiver of the plaintiff's right to challenge the SSO's prior decisions regarding the standard since the Articles were indefinite.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

Firm shareholder Henry Sneath's article "The New Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016" was published in the 2016 Fall/Winter edition of USLAW Magazine.

Firm shareholder Henry Sneath's ed a CLE on the New Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 for the Western Pennsylvania chapter of the Association of Corporate Counsel

Firm shareholder Alan Miller was named as the 2017 Best Lawyer Environmental Litigator of the Year and also was named a 2016 Super Lawyer in Insurance Coverage.

Firm shareholder Henry Sneath was named a 2016 Super Lawyer in Intellectual Property Litigation; firm shareholder Anthony Picadio was named a 2016 Super Lawyer in Business Litigation; firm associate Brandon McCullough was named a 2016 Super Lawyer Rising Star in Insurance Coverage.

On May 25, 2016, Firm shareholder Jeff Ludwikowski presented "Voir Dire and Jury Selection" with Honorable Ronald Folina, at the Crowne Plaza Pittsburgh, as part of the National Business Institute's Continuing Education Programs.

Firm shareholder Henry Sneath and firm associate led and presented at a 2-hour CLE on "Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA): The New Federal Private Cause of Action for Trade Secret Misappropriation."

Firm shareholder Kelly Williams spoke at the USLAW Business to Business Litigation Exchange in San Francisco on Prosecuting and Defending Business Defamation and Commercial Disparagement Claims by or Against Competitors Including Social Media Issues.

Firm shareholder Jeff Ludwikowski spoke on "Wacky Pennsylvania Construction Laws" at the U.S. Law Network Spring Conference in Rancho Palos Verdes California, which took place on April 7-9, 2016.

Firm shareholder Jeff Ludwikowski was selected to serve a two year term as Education Coordinator for the Construction Law Section of the U.S. Law Network.

Firm shareholder Bridget Gillespie and firm associate Brandon McCullough served as Regional Editors and Co-Authors of the Pennsylvania Chapter of the DRI Duty to Defend Compendium which was published in February 2016.

Disclaimer

The information on this website is for educational and informative purposes. Neither it nor the website is intended to create an attorney-client relationship. It is not to be taken as legal advice on which you should rely, and is not a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney in your state. If you require legal advice, we recommend that you contact a licensed attorney who can provide advice based on your specific factual circumstances, the jurisdiction you are in, and the appropriate law for your situation. Please do not send us confidential information unless we have specifically requested that you do so. To the extent that any prior firm results are discussed, there is no guarantee that such results will be obtained in the future. Finally, other than the PSMN® website, we have no control over the sites that we link to, so we make no representations about the content or quality of these external sites.

Office Location And Contact Information

Picadio Sneath Miller & Norton, P.C., is a Pittsburgh law firm that serves clients primarily in Pennsylvania, but also in other jurisdictions on a special admission basis.